Are these just electronic crossovers pretty much? I've not dealt with these at all so if anybody has some good learner sites or information on what exactly they do or how they do it I'm all ears.
Replies (9)
cplkittle on 11/22/2007 02:03:06
do you have one in mind? Or are you just asking about processors in general?
Digital sound processors (DSP) are much more than crossovers. They normally have variable crossovers with adjustable slopes for multiple bands; multiple band equalizers with adjustable q factors; time correction settings and some come with a mic for automatic adjustements; and the digital sound processor itself is responsible for imaging effects commonly known as hall, theater, cathedral, living room, stage, concert, etc..
They are alot more than a fancy crossover, 1/3 octave eq, or epicenter. If I am lucky, Santa is bringing me the alpine DSP/multimedia center PXA-H701
swez on 11/22/2007 09:22:44
There are many types of active Signal Processors out there. What functions are you considering at this point? (EQ, Crossovers, Line Driver, DSP)
Swez
Grdevs24zero on 11/22/2007 12:17:34
I'm just asking in general. Once I get my interior finished (it's gonna be a while) I may add a little to the system. I've heard of a few people using them but it's so out of the norm it's hard to get some solid info on them. I'm mainly interested in the crossover area of them.
I'm wondering if I were to get a set of basic components, midwoofers and tweeters, that these would be sufficient enough to set the crossover points of each speaker where I want them, eliminating the need for the in-line crossovers that come with so many components?
cplkittle on 11/22/2007 13:47:25
If you are patient and determined, you can build your own crossover network. I've never done it myself, and don't understand it completely, but Swez is pretty sharp in that area.
There are formulas that will tell you what capacitors or resistors to use at certain ohm loads that will filter out certain frequencies for each style driver.
If I were to do it myself, I would go ahead and build a 3 way system breaking up the mids and highs into 3 seperate sections (tweeter, 3 or 4" midrange driver, and a 6.5" or 8 woofer"
swez on 11/22/2007 21:00:37
Electronic crossovers are pretty much king of the heap if one can afford them and knows how to make them work. They are great for high accuracy, very precise yet variable to do justice to a wide range of component speakers available today. Here, we are sometimes using a Bi-amped system where the Mid has an amp channel as does the tweeter. There are variations and combinations too, but we'll save that for another discussion.
Frankly, have dabbled in passives a bit and have some understanding of the basics, but these can get so complex in high end systems that it does take a real seasoned engineer and computer design software to do them properly. They work well enough in Mobile rigs and have low signal losses of only 1.2 dB. That's very tolerable when using outboard amps.
Why not toss out a few ideas and we can explore the topic as needed. Get a few thoughts on the table to look at and we can go deeper as you wish. Can tell you this is a deep subject for a non-techical though. But will try to keep it simple and leave the good stuff on the lower shelf for all to grab and munch on.
Yes, this is a good topic to explore, but it gets deep pretty fast and a good pair of chest waders are recommneded.
Swez
Ash on 11/23/2007 00:06:23
The cost of separate active crossovers have come down because almost all amps include them now, although they can be somewhat inferior in adjustment to outboard. This can still present a problem especially when using mono amps as very few have defeatable crossovers that will let an external fully take over.
Even with the limits, which aren't much of a problem when running highs and mids, it is much quicker, precise, and cost effective to run all active. Going with passives are mostly favorable when building component sets, or there are less channels for bi/ tri amplifications. Very true in home audio.
Designing a passive can be tedious as it is trial & error even after using software to come up with the ideal setup. The final judgement will be the listeners ears, if trained enough, aided with some test gear. The gear can be somewhat expensive to attain which can be a big turn off if only a few or less projects will be done. The initial investment can be staggering considering the cost of the final project.
Example:
Real-time spectrum analyzer
Oscilloscope
Calibrated electec microphone
Pre amp with phantom power (drives the mic)
Various cables
Not to mention a good array of extra coils, caps and resistors to have on standby for final tweaking. That is if you're striving to be a purist. Still even amateur work can require much to get it right. Textbook crossovers (on paper, software, etc) are not that accurate for final work. The ones that get pretty close are very sophisticated and the cost is up there. Not for the average Joe looking to save a buck.
Still it is posible to attain good results with high quality drivers that require less manipulation for a good response.
In short, go active....
swez on 11/23/2007 06:32:30
Wow... well said Ash!
Have been meaning to comment that your personal skill levels in this field have grown trmendously over the past year. It takes a lot of reading, digesting and experimentation to grasp the level of game being played here now. (Nice work and it's paying off)
Also, the technical writing skills have jumped up a few notches as well. You have developed the ability to take a very complex subject and bring to a level that a seasoned tech can learn, yet even the newbie can understand and apply. That takes real skill and understanding of a given subject.
Kudos to ya bro,
Swez
Ash on 11/23/2007 06:56:29
Gee thanks Swez....
Hadn't realize that. Guess I've been conversating with people not really hip on things so much that I got used to breaking it down without sounding nerdy, offensive, or talking out the side of my neck. People are more pliable when they can grasp it at least a little. Plus helping and learning on the boards has been a gift.
Grdevs24zero on 12/2/2007 22:10:14
After quite a bit of research and thinking, I think I've put together a winner of a combination. I'd like to get everybodies input on this.
The goal: A geat sounding active setup.
First off let's start out with the head unit. I currently have a Pioneer 690UB and I love it. But, if I were to go active I would need a seperate processor or a new head unit. It seems the cheapest here would be a Pioneer 880PRS. Disregard my Pioneer fanboy comments, I want your honest opinions. I've seen Clarion and Eclipse units too, but frankly the 880 looks pretty good.
The other option would be the stand-alone processor to add with my 690UB unit. I'm leaning towards the Alpine RUX-C701.
(Link: http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_8024_Alpine+RUX-C701.html )
Which would you go with in that situation?
For tweeters, I was looking at some Morel MDT-29's. The problem I see here is they are 8 Ohm. If I were to run two in paralell I would lose the Time Adjustment would I not? The other option I see is to solder a 4 Ohm resistor between the two connectors on the speaker, then connect the wires normally?
( Link: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=277-010 )
For midranges: SEAS CA18RNX 7" These are 8 Ohm as well.
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=823
For the amp: (Going with a 4 channel so I have 1 channel for each speaker.)
MTX TA5604
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_6649_MTX+Audio+TA5604+Thunder+5604.html
or
Alpine MRP F550
http://www.woofersetc.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=5236
There are many others, but I'd like to keep the price of the amp under $250. A defeatable filter would be nice too, so I could let the processor do all the work.
Opinons?
Replies (9)
cplkittle on 11/22/2007 02:03:06
do you have one in mind? Or are you just asking about processors in general?
Digital sound processors (DSP) are much more than crossovers. They normally have variable crossovers with adjustable slopes for multiple bands; multiple band equalizers with adjustable q factors; time correction settings and some come with a mic for automatic adjustements; and the digital sound processor itself is responsible for imaging effects commonly known as hall, theater, cathedral, living room, stage, concert, etc..
They are alot more than a fancy crossover, 1/3 octave eq, or epicenter. If I am lucky, Santa is bringing me the alpine DSP/multimedia center PXA-H701
swez on 11/22/2007 09:22:44
There are many types of active Signal Processors out there. What functions are you considering at this point? (EQ, Crossovers, Line Driver, DSP)
Swez
Grdevs24zero on 11/22/2007 12:17:34
I'm just asking in general. Once I get my interior finished (it's gonna be a while) I may add a little to the system. I've heard of a few people using them but it's so out of the norm it's hard to get some solid info on them. I'm mainly interested in the crossover area of them.
I'm wondering if I were to get a set of basic components, midwoofers and tweeters, that these would be sufficient enough to set the crossover points of each speaker where I want them, eliminating the need for the in-line crossovers that come with so many components?
cplkittle on 11/22/2007 13:47:25
If you are patient and determined, you can build your own crossover network. I've never done it myself, and don't understand it completely, but Swez is pretty sharp in that area.
There are formulas that will tell you what capacitors or resistors to use at certain ohm loads that will filter out certain frequencies for each style driver.
If I were to do it myself, I would go ahead and build a 3 way system breaking up the mids and highs into 3 seperate sections (tweeter, 3 or 4" midrange driver, and a 6.5" or 8 woofer"
swez on 11/22/2007 21:00:37
Electronic crossovers are pretty much king of the heap if one can afford them and knows how to make them work. They are great for high accuracy, very precise yet variable to do justice to a wide range of component speakers available today. Here, we are sometimes using a Bi-amped system where the Mid has an amp channel as does the tweeter. There are variations and combinations too, but we'll save that for another discussion.
Frankly, have dabbled in passives a bit and have some understanding of the basics, but these can get so complex in high end systems that it does take a real seasoned engineer and computer design software to do them properly. They work well enough in Mobile rigs and have low signal losses of only 1.2 dB. That's very tolerable when using outboard amps.
Why not toss out a few ideas and we can explore the topic as needed. Get a few thoughts on the table to look at and we can go deeper as you wish. Can tell you this is a deep subject for a non-techical though. But will try to keep it simple and leave the good stuff on the lower shelf for all to grab and munch on.
Yes, this is a good topic to explore, but it gets deep pretty fast and a good pair of chest waders are recommneded.
Swez
Ash on 11/23/2007 00:06:23
The cost of separate active crossovers have come down because almost all amps include them now, although they can be somewhat inferior in adjustment to outboard. This can still present a problem especially when using mono amps as very few have defeatable crossovers that will let an external fully take over.
Even with the limits, which aren't much of a problem when running highs and mids, it is much quicker, precise, and cost effective to run all active. Going with passives are mostly favorable when building component sets, or there are less channels for bi/ tri amplifications. Very true in home audio.
Designing a passive can be tedious as it is trial & error even after using software to come up with the ideal setup. The final judgement will be the listeners ears, if trained enough, aided with some test gear. The gear can be somewhat expensive to attain which can be a big turn off if only a few or less projects will be done. The initial investment can be staggering considering the cost of the final project.
Example:
Real-time spectrum analyzer
Oscilloscope
Calibrated electec microphone
Pre amp with phantom power (drives the mic)
Various cables
Not to mention a good array of extra coils, caps and resistors to have on standby for final tweaking. That is if you're striving to be a purist. Still even amateur work can require much to get it right. Textbook crossovers (on paper, software, etc) are not that accurate for final work. The ones that get pretty close are very sophisticated and the cost is up there. Not for the average Joe looking to save a buck.
Still it is posible to attain good results with high quality drivers that require less manipulation for a good response.
In short, go active....
swez on 11/23/2007 06:32:30
Wow... well said Ash!
Have been meaning to comment that your personal skill levels in this field have grown trmendously over the past year. It takes a lot of reading, digesting and experimentation to grasp the level of game being played here now. (Nice work and it's paying off)
Also, the technical writing skills have jumped up a few notches as well. You have developed the ability to take a very complex subject and bring to a level that a seasoned tech can learn, yet even the newbie can understand and apply. That takes real skill and understanding of a given subject.
Kudos to ya bro,
Swez
Ash on 11/23/2007 06:56:29
Gee thanks Swez....
Hadn't realize that. Guess I've been conversating with people not really hip on things so much that I got used to breaking it down without sounding nerdy, offensive, or talking out the side of my neck. People are more pliable when they can grasp it at least a little. Plus helping and learning on the boards has been a gift.
Grdevs24zero on 12/2/2007 22:10:14
After quite a bit of research and thinking, I think I've put together a winner of a combination. I'd like to get everybodies input on this.
The goal: A geat sounding active setup.
First off let's start out with the head unit. I currently have a Pioneer 690UB and I love it. But, if I were to go active I would need a seperate processor or a new head unit. It seems the cheapest here would be a Pioneer 880PRS. Disregard my Pioneer fanboy comments, I want your honest opinions. I've seen Clarion and Eclipse units too, but frankly the 880 looks pretty good.
The other option would be the stand-alone processor to add with my 690UB unit. I'm leaning towards the Alpine RUX-C701.
(Link: http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_8024_Alpine+RUX-C701.html )
Which would you go with in that situation?
For tweeters, I was looking at some Morel MDT-29's. The problem I see here is they are 8 Ohm. If I were to run two in paralell I would lose the Time Adjustment would I not? The other option I see is to solder a 4 Ohm resistor between the two connectors on the speaker, then connect the wires normally?
( Link: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=277-010 )
For midranges: SEAS CA18RNX 7" These are 8 Ohm as well.
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=823
For the amp: (Going with a 4 channel so I have 1 channel for each speaker.)
MTX TA5604
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_6649_MTX+Audio+TA5604+Thunder+5604.html
or
Alpine MRP F550
http://www.woofersetc.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=5236
There are many others, but I'd like to keep the price of the amp under $250. A defeatable filter would be nice too, so I could let the processor do all the work.
Opinons?
Copyright ClubKnowledge 2009 * All Rights Reserved
